DeepSeek vs Claude

As of 2026-10-13, Claude (Anthropic: Claude Opus 5.5, 8.3/10) leads DeepSeek (DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731, 8.1/10) in our daily benchmark, where over 350 AI models are evaluated.

This is the comparison where the price gap is extreme. DeepSeek costs a fraction of Claude per token. The question is what you give up in quality — and on Scandinavian languages the answer is more nuanced than in English.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731
Score: 8.1/10
Language: 8.7/10
Speed: 452 t/s
$0.02
Anthropic
Claude
Anthropic: Claude Opus 5.5
Score: 8.3/10
Language: 9.0/10
Speed: 266 t/s
$4.00

Side by side

DeepSeekClaude
In today’s benchmarkDeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731Anthropic: Claude Opus 5.5
Score8.1/108.3/10
Language8.7/109.0/10
Speed452 t/s266 t/s
Input price/1M$0.02$4.00

What separates them?

Claude is among the strongest models on Scandinavian language quality and on long, coherent reasoning. DeepSeek is very strong on code and maths at a price that means you barely have to think about cost. On Scandinavian text the gap is usually noticeable — see the language score in the table for what it is today.

Privacy is a real difference

DeepSeek is a Chinese company, and data sent to their service is processed outside the EU. For a Scandinavian organisation handling personal data or commercially sensitive information, that alone is reason to choose something else, whatever the benchmark says. For open source, learning and non-sensitive prototyping, DeepSeek is an excellent buy.

hvilkenAI is independent. We have no affiliate agreements, sponsored placements or commercial ties to the AI providers we test. The numbers above come from today’s benchmark.

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek as good as Claude?
On code and maths it is close. On Scandinavian text Claude is usually stronger. See the numbers in the table above — they update daily.
How much cheaper is DeepSeek?
The prices in the table are fetched daily and show the difference per million tokens. It is large enough to change what is economically possible to build.
Is DeepSeek safe to use?
Not for personal data or sensitive business information without an approved data processing agreement. For publicly available content and experimentation it is unproblematic.

Read also

← Back to home

How to get more value from this comparison

Use this comparison as a practical decision aid, not as an advertising list. HvilkenAI is built to make AI selection easier when the market changes quickly and model names alone say little about real quality.

Start with the task you actually need to solve. A model that is good at short chat is not automatically best for long documents, code, customer-facing text, research or work involving sensitive information. Consider language quality, price, speed, stability and how much editing the answer requires before choosing a subscription or API.

We evaluate over 350 AI models and present the most useful signals in a format that works for everyday users, students, businesses and developers. The exact calculation is proprietary, but the assessment is based on standardised tasks, updated benchmark data and editorial review of whether the recommendations make sense in practical use.

For important decisions, run a small test of your own: use the same prompt, language and expected format in two or three relevant models. Look at precision, source handling, tone, speed and how easy the answer is to verify. That makes the benchmark a time-saving starting point, not a final answer you must follow blindly.

Use the links on the page as well. One page rarely gives the whole picture: the benchmark shows today’s numbers, the AI test translates your need into concrete recommendations, and the privacy/terms pages explain which data and limitations you should consider. Used together, these sources make the choice more robust than following a model name from social media.

If the result will be used at work, document why the tool was chosen: which task it solves, which alternatives were considered, which data should not be shared and how the answer will be quality-checked. That makes it easier to switch model later if price, quality or provider terms change.

When a page is included in the sitemap, it should also stand on its own as a useful explanation. That is why we emphasise practical choices, concrete control questions and clear limits for how data can be used.

The goal is that the reader can move on with a safer choice after a few minutes, without already knowing every model or provider.

Pay particular attention to whether the recommendation fits the language, price and risk in your own situation.

In short: choose what you can verify.

When free is enough

Choose free or low-cost first when the task is simple, risk is low and you can verify the answer yourself.

When paid is worth it

Paid models can be worth the cost when documents are long, precision matters or you save real working time.

When to wait

If the need is unclear, start with the test and benchmark before committing to a provider.